Sabre Video Clip

[Craig]

Just got done cutting some of the 2004 moscow sabre semifinal bouts.

Here is a brief clip: (about 8MB)

http://www.fencing101.com/vids/2004m...inals-clip.mov

(You'll need to wait about 4 minutes from when I added the thread for the file to upload...)

[wflaschka]

Huah! Montano's last touch is very pretty.

[KShan5[PrFC]]

Something weird happens right at the beginning of the Montano-Tarantino bout...way to leave us hangin though....14-14.

[Coup de Grace]

Sweet! Is this for the double disc you are releasing soon?

[Purple Fencer]

Huah! Montano's last touch is very pretty.

Yeah.....but I had to watch it a TON of times to see it was his remise rather than a counterattack to Tarantino's last action.

[whtouche]

Yeah.....but I had to watch it a TON of times to see it was his remise rather than a counterattack to Tarantino's last action.

What exactly is the difference between a remise and a counter attack to the 'last action' ?

Infact, if you watch it yet again you'll see the final touch is montano's prise de fer.

[LUDICROUS]

What exactly is the difference between a remise and a counter attack to the 'last action' ?

Infact, if you watch it yet again you'll see the final touch is montano's prise de fer.

1/100th of a second?

[dunastor]

What exactly is the difference between a remise and a counter attack to the 'last action' ?

Infact, if you watch it yet again you'll see the final touch is montano's prise de fer.

That's right, the first attack from Montano is short, there's no riposte from Tarantino, so Montano does an attack with prise de fer.

[Purple Fencer]

What exactly is the difference between a remise and a counter attack to the 'last action' ?

Infact, if you watch it yet again you'll see the final touch is montano's prise de fer.

I didn't see the prise. What I saw was Montano attacking and falling short, then Tarantino coming forward with his feet only...no blade. Then Montano's remise THEN Tarantino's blade goes.

'Course, my sabre directing skills aren't good enough for top level, or even a moderate NAC....like I said, I had to watch it a LOT.

[prototoast]

I didn't see the prise. What I saw was Montano attacking and falling short, then Tarantino coming forward with his feet only...no blade. Then Montano's remise THEN Tarantino's blade goes.

'Course, my sabre directing skills aren't good enough for top level, or even a moderate NAC....like I said, I had to watch it a LOT.

Forget about your eyes, did you listen?

[edew]

I didn't see the prise. What I saw was Montano attacking and falling short, then Tarantino coming forward with his feet only...no blade. Then Montano's remise THEN Tarantino's blade goes.

'Course, my sabre directing skills aren't good enough for top level, or even a moderate NAC....like I said, I had to watch it a LOT.

Purp,

Suppose you were refereeing this bout and you called it as you saw it above: attack by Montano no, remise (or reprise) by Montano yes, attack by Tarantino is late, touch for Montano; you would not be wrong. But no more wrong than if you had called it, attack by Montano no, attack by Tarantino yes, remise (reprise) by Montano late.

I've matched many a video clip from the rather large library of tapes I have from Peter G and others. Many of those clips show the actual phrase and the slo-mo. I'd say there's about 15-20% chance that the referee got it wrong on the quick two-light actions. (It's usually clear because one of the fencers look up in a state of shock.)

But the reason these referees are there and you're not is that they don't take LOTS of review to make the call. You should just go and make the best call you can and be done with it. Stick to the call and ignore any complaints. Develop a thick skin and continue along. Remember, as a referee, you are ALWAYS correct when interpreting right of way.

(As for the types of saber errors I see, they fall into two main categories: parries into the forte of the opponent, hence really attacks or counter-attacks that are actually parried by the opponent; and attacks that end with the front foot hitting the ground, but the arm continues while the opponent begins his attack. The call here would be attack is no (when the foot hits the ground), attack is yes by the opponent, and redouble is late.)

[Mihail]

Holy crap, these guys are boring. Top international sabre is becoming so unimaginitive. I hope someone creative steps up and lights the top few seeds on fire because, man, it's getting stagnant.

This french guy Lopez is one of the only sabre fencers that gets creative on the strip, but he's not strong enough and/or experienced enough to get to the top.

[edew]

Part of the problem is that it's so easy to get hit, especially around the hand, that people don't want to chance it by making flashy actions. Keep it simple with quick decisive actions and you'll go farther up the DE table.

Make fancy moves and all your work goes out the window because your scared-out-of-pants opponent stuck his hand out and nailed you on your arm.

Some helps: make the guard bigger. Stiffen the blade a tad more. Make it a bit heavier, too.

As for the clip, saw the Montano-Tarantino phrase. Attack by Montano no. On Tarantino's march, Montano finds the blade (heard the click) and lands a riposte. Of course, Montano could have found the blade on Tarantino's forte. There's no way I can see that on the clip. Maybe that's why Tarantino looks a bit frustrated (although I'm sure he's frustrated because his blade was found).

[sabreur]

Holy crap, these guys are boring. Top international sabre is becoming so unimaginitive. I hope someone creative steps up and lights the top few seeds on fire because, man, it's getting stagnant.

This french guy Lopez is one of the only sabre fencers that gets creative on the strip, but he's not strong enough and/or experienced enough to get to the top.

It's only boring if you focus on hand/blade actions. Watch their feet. There is an amazing amount going on with the footwork. Once one guy has tempo and has closed distance, they are too well trained not to get the hit (in most cases).

I used to think that making the block-out time longer would help favor defense a bit more, but you get weird touches where both guys are blocked out and no lights go on. I'd still like to see some experiments in that direction.

I actually think the referees do better than EDEW says. When I watch top level sabre in slow motion, I end up agreeing with the ref, or at least understanding why he called the action the way he did, almost all the time. And they tend to be very consistent in their calls, which is the real key. If you understand WHY a ref is calling an action a particular way, you can try to adjust.

Thanks Craig.

MR

[Inquartata]

I couldn't have said it better myself, Sabreur. ( More long-windedly, yes, but not better. )

[Peach]

The last action looks pretty clearly to me as if Montano finds the blade and attacks (a very gutsy late action in close distance when Tarantino must have been sure his attack had already landed).

[edew]

It's only boring if you focus on hand/blade actions. Watch their feet. There is an amazing amount going on with the footwork. Once one guy has tempo and has closed distance, they are too well trained not to get the hit (in most cases).

I used to think that making the block-out time longer would help favor defense a bit more, but you get weird touches where both guys are blocked out and no lights go on. I'd still like to see some experiments in that direction.

I actually think the referees do better than EDEW says. When I watch top level sabre in slow motion, I end up agreeing with the ref, or at least understanding why he called the action the way he did, almost all the time. And they tend to be very consistent in their calls, which is the real key. If you understand WHY a ref is calling an action a particular way, you can try to adjust.

Thanks Craig.

MR

I didn't mean to imply 15-20% of all calls are wrong. I'm saying that 15-20% very disputable calls are wrong. The vast majority of the calls are very clear, either the one-lights or the clear parry-riposte vs remise, or attack-into-preparation actions. The tight ones where it's hard to discern who really started first, iffy parries (or was it a beat to the forte), etc., are where the errors would crop up.

I generally tell fencers: don't get into such situations. Make your attacks clear and it helps the ref which will help you.

[sabreur]

I didn't mean to imply 15-20% of all calls are wrong. I'm saying that 15-20% very disputable calls are wrong. The vast majority of the calls are very clear, either the one-lights or the clear parry-riposte vs remise, or attack-into-preparation actions. The tight ones where it's hard to discern who really started first, iffy parries (or was it a beat to the forte), etc., are where the errors would crop up.

I generally tell fencers: don't get into such situations. Make your attacks clear and it helps the ref which will help you.

Ahhhhhh. Then we agree, basically.

MR

[wflaschka]

Does the final Montano action fall under the category of "hard to call"?

I had read the action as: [Attack from left, short.] Attack from right, left parry riposte touch.

The comments here talk about Montano's prise de fer, as a reprise of his first attack. So is Montano on the attack or the defense for his scoring touch? If Montano's on the attack, is it because Tarantino is definitionally not attacking since his arm isn't extending? After Montano's short attack, there is a break, and Tarantino does look like he's attacking, which would frame Montano's answer as a defensive action. Based on the comments either call may be okay; is there a definitive call for this?

It's these subtleties that continue trip me up with sabre; I think something is dirt obvious but then get surprised. I think this touch may be an example of a clip for a FOC video tool (from the other thread). It would be useful especially in locales where sabre is spread thin.

[penguin_2000]

Nice video clips, thanks, Craig.

On the last point, I would have called attack short. No reposte. Remise from left, parry reposte (by virtue of foible to forte contact), point right. But, I think the contact was called in favor of Montano as pris-de-fere.